Rajesh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 88 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23982 of 2023 Applicant :- Rajesh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Raj Prajapati,Dinesh Kumar Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. 1-Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional

Government

Advocate

for

the State/opposite party no.1, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and perused the record. 2-This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet no. 01 of 2020 dated 15.11.2020, cognizance order dated 02.08.2021 and proceedings of Session Trial No. 40 of 2021 (State vs. Rajesh Kumar & Others) arising out of case crime no. 184 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 387 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Konch, District Jalaun pending in the Court of Special Judge (D.A.A.) Jalaun at Orai. 3-It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the opposite party no. 2 lodged a first information report on 09.09.2020 with regard to an incident dated 05.09.2020 against the applicants under Sections 323, 504, 325 and 387 I.P.C., in which after culmination of investigation, charge-sheet dated 15.11.2020 has been submitted against the applicants, on which the Magistrate concerned took cognizance and summoned the applicants to face trial. Thereafter, the parties concerned have settled their dispute outside the Court. The applicants have preferred an Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 1992 of 2022, which was disposed of vide order dated

16.07.2022 with a direction to the concerned court below to verify the compromise. In compliance thereof, the compromise has been verified by the trial court vide order dated 12.09.2022, which has been brought on record as Annexure No. 4 to the application. 4-On the strength of aforesaid facts, it is submitted that on account of compromise arrived at between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end, therefore continuance of criminal proceedings pursuant to impugned charge-sheet against the applicants after compromise between them would be a futile exercise and the same is liable to be quashed by this Court. 5-Learned Additional Government Advocate as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party No. 2 do not dispute the aforesaid facts. Learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 has also submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, opposite party No.2 has no grievance and has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicants. 6-After having heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, I find that after compromise/settlement arrived at between the parties in the present case, the chance of ultimate conviction is bleak and therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution against the applicants to continue, as the same would be futile exercise and a sheer wastage of precious time of the Court. The continuation of a criminal proceedings after compromise would cause oppression and prejudice to the parties concerned. If the parties concerned wants to bury the hatchet and are willing to move on in personal dispute on the basis of compromise, they may be allowed to compound the offences in terms of settlement, because in such circumstances the proceedings can hardly be taken to their logical culmination and, the prospect of conviction gets lost. 7-The Apex Court in case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and others AIR 2019 SC 1296 and Ramgopal and another vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh 2021 Supreme (SC) 529 after wholesome treatment has laid down guidelines for quashing of criminal proceedings arising out of non-compoundable offences under Section 320 Cr.P.C. on the basis of compromise, wherein quashing of proceeding of criminal cases which involved non compoundable offences has been approved by the Apex Court if the nature of the offence is private in nature and does not have a serious impact on society. 8-Considering the facts and circumstances of this case in the light of dictum and guidelines laid down by the Apex Court as mentioned above, I find that the case in hand does not have grave and wider social ramifications and the dispute is more or less confined between the litigating parties, therefore this Court feels that this is a fit case, where this Court can exercise its inherent power to secure the end of justice. In the case in hand interest of justice would be met, if the prayer of parties is acceded to and the criminal proceedings and other litigation between the parties is brought to an end. 9-In view of the above, the aforesaid criminal proceedings against the applicants are hereby quashed. 10-The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed in terms of compromise as mentioned above. Order Date :- 20.11.2023 Saurabh High Court of Judicature at Allahabad